Greetings Fellow Bloggers and Other Miscreants,
Finally, some good news. You won't see it from U.S. sources, but the BBC is carrying it. Our government is going to be held to some kind of account for it's treatment of the prisoners in Guantanamo. It is to be hoped that those performing the cross-examination will be thorough.
Without the internet and BBC, I don't think we'd be able to get any kind of news. It would just all be so much rice cereal designed to clog our systems.
Granuaile.
04 May 2006
The Fox Is in Charge of the Hen House
Greetings Fellow Bloggers and Other Miscreants,
You may recall the uproar over Vermont AP Bureau Chief Chris Graff. The reasons for his termination have now become clear. The AP is indeed an arm of the government and is censoring the news we get to read. Read it here.
That I am disgusted is putting it mildly.
Granuaile.
You may recall the uproar over Vermont AP Bureau Chief Chris Graff. The reasons for his termination have now become clear. The AP is indeed an arm of the government and is censoring the news we get to read. Read it here.
That I am disgusted is putting it mildly.
Granuaile.
27 April 2006
I'm the Decider
Greetings Fellow bloggers and other miscreants,
Huffington hits one out of the park ... click here.
Granuaile.
Huffington hits one out of the park ... click here.
Granuaile.
26 March 2006
What's the Point?
Greetings Fellow Bloggers and Other Miscreants,
Someone said to me (under other circumstances), "Until someone can provide some evidence that the government is actively suppressing the press, I can only believe that it is the press monitoring itself for business purposes."
I have to say that when I read that statement I very nearly blew several gaskets. I tried to remind myself that this person is young and probably knows not of what he speaks. But therein lies the problem. He should know of what he speaks.
We've lost our point. Rather the press has lost it's point. They've forgotten that they are not just another business out there to make a buck. In a democracy the press has a job to do. It's their bound duty to report on the government to the people and vice versa. Report on the people to the government. What do "the masses" consider important? What is the government up to? How are they spending our taxes? Just what are they doing? Somehow someone must hold the feet of the government to the fire. It's up to the press to help us do that. Without an independent press who is not monitoring itself for business purposes, we don't have a mouth piece.
We got nothing.
The press doesn't get to act as if it's the auto industry or the steel industry or the clothing industry. Because it's not. It has a significant job to do that those industries do not. They do not contribute to our system of checks and balances in our government. The press does. It carries a significant responsibility and that carries a cost. Boohoo ... too bad. Those who get into it know those costs when they choose it. It's no place to get rich. But then neither is teaching or ministry and people choose those all the time. There are certain professions that one chooses because they carry a certain weight of responsibility and calling. Journalism is one of those professions. Good journalists understand this. They understand their role in our democracy. They also understand that they are not businessmen out to make a buck.
Journalism (or "the press") is an institution which aids in the proper functioning of our democracy. Thus it may not monitor itself for solely business purposes. It has a higher purpose for which it must monitor itself. In addition, the government must not subsidize it. The reasons for that must be obvious and I won't go into that here.
The fact that too few people watch the news and that 36% of 110,000 college students surveyed think that news articles ought to receive government approval before being published is appalling. That should make our Founding Fathers dust roll in their graves. We are living in extremely dangerous times, and that has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorists or Osama binLaden.
Granuaile.
Someone said to me (under other circumstances), "Until someone can provide some evidence that the government is actively suppressing the press, I can only believe that it is the press monitoring itself for business purposes."
I have to say that when I read that statement I very nearly blew several gaskets. I tried to remind myself that this person is young and probably knows not of what he speaks. But therein lies the problem. He should know of what he speaks.
We've lost our point. Rather the press has lost it's point. They've forgotten that they are not just another business out there to make a buck. In a democracy the press has a job to do. It's their bound duty to report on the government to the people and vice versa. Report on the people to the government. What do "the masses" consider important? What is the government up to? How are they spending our taxes? Just what are they doing? Somehow someone must hold the feet of the government to the fire. It's up to the press to help us do that. Without an independent press who is not monitoring itself for business purposes, we don't have a mouth piece.
We got nothing.
The press doesn't get to act as if it's the auto industry or the steel industry or the clothing industry. Because it's not. It has a significant job to do that those industries do not. They do not contribute to our system of checks and balances in our government. The press does. It carries a significant responsibility and that carries a cost. Boohoo ... too bad. Those who get into it know those costs when they choose it. It's no place to get rich. But then neither is teaching or ministry and people choose those all the time. There are certain professions that one chooses because they carry a certain weight of responsibility and calling. Journalism is one of those professions. Good journalists understand this. They understand their role in our democracy. They also understand that they are not businessmen out to make a buck.
Journalism (or "the press") is an institution which aids in the proper functioning of our democracy. Thus it may not monitor itself for solely business purposes. It has a higher purpose for which it must monitor itself. In addition, the government must not subsidize it. The reasons for that must be obvious and I won't go into that here.
The fact that too few people watch the news and that 36% of 110,000 college students surveyed think that news articles ought to receive government approval before being published is appalling. That should make our Founding Fathers dust roll in their graves. We are living in extremely dangerous times, and that has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorists or Osama binLaden.
Granuaile.
25 March 2006
Braveheart
Greetings Fellow Bloggers and Other Miscreants,
One of my favorite movies of all time is Braveheart. My husband and I saw it when it first came out and our daughter was a tiny baby. It was (I think) our first "date" after she was born. We left her with a family we trusted and respected and went to the theater to see this movie. To be really honest, I was going to see Mel Gibson with long hair in a kilt (three of my favorite things all in one place). Come to think of it, the family we left her with had a daughter who was 12 at the time. Wow ... time flies when you're living. I remember when we came out of the theater it felt like we had time traveled and nothing seemed right. The movie had seemed so real that we felt that we were somehow in the wrong time and place. The car seemed strange. I can remember the feeling and still can't describe it very well, but it was profound.
The next thing we did (being us) was go to Barnes & Noble and pick up a few books on Scottish-English history and discovered that very little in movie was correct. Well, it was correct, it was just out of chronological order. There really was a William Wallace and he lived and died doing the things that he was depicted as doing, just not during the time that he was shown in the movie. Oh well. And yes, Edward the Longshanks really was that nasty, etc. My favorite line from the movie still comes from the Irishman Steven as they're preparing for one of the battles and he turned to William and said ... well ... I'm trying to keep profanity off my blog. If you know the movie well enough, you'll know the line.
The main message of the movie (at least in the world according to me) is that you have a choice in this world. You can either be safe or you can be free. And actually it is when you choose freedom that you become safe. But when you choose safety, you are never actually safe from evil. It's counter-intuitive. But choosing safety means that those who peddle fear and hold power get to use it more and more. I'm thinking here of the rights of prima nocte as well as the many other tools that Edward I had at his disposal to keep his subjects under control. But the more the Highlanders chose freedom and to live their own lives the safer from fear they actually became.
Yes, I get that it's just a movie and Mel (and the producers had some say in how things ended). But Jesus had somethings to say about this too. Things like: if you try to save your life, you'll lose it, but if you give it away, you'll find it.
So, yesterday I snarkily said something like "people who are smarter than I think that this country is in trouble too. But only time will tell." And today I was out browsing the news and found several news items relating to a speech given at Georgetown University on March 9 by none other than retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. There are no transcripts published of the speech on-line (at least that I could find). I purchased a transcript of Nina Totenburg's (from NPR) report about the speech. And here's the link to an editorial from the Boston Globe about it. If you'd like to see Nina Totenburg's report, you can go to NPR and purchase a copy of it (for about $4.00). But suffice it to say that I've hardly ever agreed with Sandra Day O'Connor on anything, so I was somewhat taken aback to find what strange bedfellows I now have.
The Army used to have as an advertising slogan, "Freedom isn't free." That's true. It's not. Safety isn't safe either. And apathy isn't getting us anywhere. Despite what some may think we are living in dangerous times. We are wandering on the knife edge of loosing our freedom. It is only our freedom which keeps us truly safe from tyranny and evil ... both without and within.
It's worth taking a few minutes to remind yourself of what we do have and why it's worth defending ... even with a phone call or letter to your Representative or Senator. Here's a link to the Bill of Rights. This has been gutted by the Patriot Act .... when the CIA and/or the FBI can get a hold of your reading list from the local library without warrants; that constitutes unreasonable search and seizure. It's a slippery slope. The government has already been caught illegally wiretapping it's own citizens. We are torturing prisoners.
In the wake of 9/11 we were told to choose safety. But I ask you ... are we really safe?
Granuaile
One of my favorite movies of all time is Braveheart. My husband and I saw it when it first came out and our daughter was a tiny baby. It was (I think) our first "date" after she was born. We left her with a family we trusted and respected and went to the theater to see this movie. To be really honest, I was going to see Mel Gibson with long hair in a kilt (three of my favorite things all in one place). Come to think of it, the family we left her with had a daughter who was 12 at the time. Wow ... time flies when you're living. I remember when we came out of the theater it felt like we had time traveled and nothing seemed right. The movie had seemed so real that we felt that we were somehow in the wrong time and place. The car seemed strange. I can remember the feeling and still can't describe it very well, but it was profound.
The next thing we did (being us) was go to Barnes & Noble and pick up a few books on Scottish-English history and discovered that very little in movie was correct. Well, it was correct, it was just out of chronological order. There really was a William Wallace and he lived and died doing the things that he was depicted as doing, just not during the time that he was shown in the movie. Oh well. And yes, Edward the Longshanks really was that nasty, etc. My favorite line from the movie still comes from the Irishman Steven as they're preparing for one of the battles and he turned to William and said ... well ... I'm trying to keep profanity off my blog. If you know the movie well enough, you'll know the line.
The main message of the movie (at least in the world according to me) is that you have a choice in this world. You can either be safe or you can be free. And actually it is when you choose freedom that you become safe. But when you choose safety, you are never actually safe from evil. It's counter-intuitive. But choosing safety means that those who peddle fear and hold power get to use it more and more. I'm thinking here of the rights of prima nocte as well as the many other tools that Edward I had at his disposal to keep his subjects under control. But the more the Highlanders chose freedom and to live their own lives the safer from fear they actually became.
Yes, I get that it's just a movie and Mel (and the producers had some say in how things ended). But Jesus had somethings to say about this too. Things like: if you try to save your life, you'll lose it, but if you give it away, you'll find it.
So, yesterday I snarkily said something like "people who are smarter than I think that this country is in trouble too. But only time will tell." And today I was out browsing the news and found several news items relating to a speech given at Georgetown University on March 9 by none other than retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. There are no transcripts published of the speech on-line (at least that I could find). I purchased a transcript of Nina Totenburg's (from NPR) report about the speech. And here's the link to an editorial from the Boston Globe about it. If you'd like to see Nina Totenburg's report, you can go to NPR and purchase a copy of it (for about $4.00). But suffice it to say that I've hardly ever agreed with Sandra Day O'Connor on anything, so I was somewhat taken aback to find what strange bedfellows I now have.
The Army used to have as an advertising slogan, "Freedom isn't free." That's true. It's not. Safety isn't safe either. And apathy isn't getting us anywhere. Despite what some may think we are living in dangerous times. We are wandering on the knife edge of loosing our freedom. It is only our freedom which keeps us truly safe from tyranny and evil ... both without and within.
It's worth taking a few minutes to remind yourself of what we do have and why it's worth defending ... even with a phone call or letter to your Representative or Senator. Here's a link to the Bill of Rights. This has been gutted by the Patriot Act .... when the CIA and/or the FBI can get a hold of your reading list from the local library without warrants; that constitutes unreasonable search and seizure. It's a slippery slope. The government has already been caught illegally wiretapping it's own citizens. We are torturing prisoners.
In the wake of 9/11 we were told to choose safety. But I ask you ... are we really safe?
Granuaile
24 March 2006
Free Press?
Greetings Fellow Bloggers and other Miscreants,
Update: What?! An update already? Yes ... because I don't think any of you saw this link to this article yesterday. Read this article. As you read, know this ... Jim Douglas is the current governor of Vermont, he is a very right wing Republican. Patrick Leahy is a long term first Representative and now US Senator and is a Democrat. Marselis Parsons has been the anchorman on the only local news worth watching in the state since I can remember and is very conservative. ... Now read on for today's post.
Update 2: Here's a link to the **frighteningly** "unbalanced" piece written by US Senator Patrick Leahy. It was pulled because no one had written an opposing point of view. Hmmm ... would that be something like "Down With the Freedom of Information" ... who is going to write that?
In a comment on my earlier post my BrickFriend made the following point:
I hardly believe that one cannot be critical of the Administration. There is not a day, it seems, upon which at least two very critical editorials are NOT printed in the WAPost or NYT. I hope and believe that things are not quite as bad as you fear. We will see.
I'll grant him that. Editorials are printed. My point was that a fine and long standing (in point of fact, the longest standing) bureau chief for the Associated Press wire service was let go in a dispute over a column written by a U.S. Senator from his own state that was critical of the administration. Newspapers receiving that column were free to use or not use that column in any manner they saw fit.
Another tiny factoid, Chris Graff's (the bureau chief) son was the first blogger ever to be invited to participate in a White House press briefing. That happened last March (2005) ... but that's an aside.
Now I'm going to use a technique we've all bandied about before and take us straight to the Nazi's. Let's take a look at the Nazi rise to power. It didn't happen overnight. In fact, Hitler spent a year in jail before he really came into his own. That's when he wrote Mein Kampf. Visit this website for a nicely put together timeline of how things went down in Germany between the two world wars. It's a quick read and will give you an idea of what I'm talking about.
I don't think that our present administration is anything like Nazi Germany (at least I hope not). My problem is that they have no problems abrogating powers to themselves that are not contained in the Constitution. And having Congress enshrine it in law (see the Patriot Act). It's not that I'm some rabid left-winger who can't stand to live under a right-wing administration. I lived happily under 12 years of Reagan and GHWBush and never felt the level of distrust that I feel now. No matter what crazy whacked policies they tried to take this country on, I always knew that they and their administrations knew and would uphold the Constitution. This administration uses the Constitution as toilet paper.
No my problem is that evil does not start out looking evil. It begins looking rational. And when people like me say something is wrong, most people say "calm down, it's really not so bad." By the time most of the rest of you realize it really is evil, it's too late. I'll just end with a (now) well known quote by Hermann Goering from his jail cell in 1946:
"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."
"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."
"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
Granuaile
Update: What?! An update already? Yes ... because I don't think any of you saw this link to this article yesterday. Read this article. As you read, know this ... Jim Douglas is the current governor of Vermont, he is a very right wing Republican. Patrick Leahy is a long term first Representative and now US Senator and is a Democrat. Marselis Parsons has been the anchorman on the only local news worth watching in the state since I can remember and is very conservative. ... Now read on for today's post.
Update 2: Here's a link to the **frighteningly** "unbalanced" piece written by US Senator Patrick Leahy. It was pulled because no one had written an opposing point of view. Hmmm ... would that be something like "Down With the Freedom of Information" ... who is going to write that?
In a comment on my earlier post my BrickFriend made the following point:
I hardly believe that one cannot be critical of the Administration. There is not a day, it seems, upon which at least two very critical editorials are NOT printed in the WAPost or NYT. I hope and believe that things are not quite as bad as you fear. We will see.
I'll grant him that. Editorials are printed. My point was that a fine and long standing (in point of fact, the longest standing) bureau chief for the Associated Press wire service was let go in a dispute over a column written by a U.S. Senator from his own state that was critical of the administration. Newspapers receiving that column were free to use or not use that column in any manner they saw fit.
Another tiny factoid, Chris Graff's (the bureau chief) son was the first blogger ever to be invited to participate in a White House press briefing. That happened last March (2005) ... but that's an aside.
Now I'm going to use a technique we've all bandied about before and take us straight to the Nazi's. Let's take a look at the Nazi rise to power. It didn't happen overnight. In fact, Hitler spent a year in jail before he really came into his own. That's when he wrote Mein Kampf. Visit this website for a nicely put together timeline of how things went down in Germany between the two world wars. It's a quick read and will give you an idea of what I'm talking about.
I don't think that our present administration is anything like Nazi Germany (at least I hope not). My problem is that they have no problems abrogating powers to themselves that are not contained in the Constitution. And having Congress enshrine it in law (see the Patriot Act). It's not that I'm some rabid left-winger who can't stand to live under a right-wing administration. I lived happily under 12 years of Reagan and GHWBush and never felt the level of distrust that I feel now. No matter what crazy whacked policies they tried to take this country on, I always knew that they and their administrations knew and would uphold the Constitution. This administration uses the Constitution as toilet paper.
No my problem is that evil does not start out looking evil. It begins looking rational. And when people like me say something is wrong, most people say "calm down, it's really not so bad." By the time most of the rest of you realize it really is evil, it's too late. I'll just end with a (now) well known quote by Hermann Goering from his jail cell in 1946:
"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."
"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."
"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
Granuaile
22 March 2006
Dammit Janet!
Greetings Fellow Bloggers and Other Miscreants,
Okay, I hope none of you out there is named Janet ... this isn't aimed at you. Some of you might remember that line from SNL of the early 80's (and thus I'm dating myself).
But, look at this article. It's from my hometown newspaper. The head of Vermont's AP bureau was fired (or did he "resign"?) over a column he ran last week. What was so controversial about this column you might ask? Well, it was a column written by our Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) criticizing the administration's secretive policies vis a vis the press. A column written by a Senator for heaven's sake ... now Senators are being censored.
Update: Check out this article for more details
Update 2: Just thought I'd mention that we (my parents and I) originally learned about this in an article in the print version of yesterday's NYTimes. But I can't access that because I don't subscribe to it. But if you want to you can browse it and find the article yourself.
Now first of all the column got pulled before it hit the national wire.
Then, Chris Graff got fired ... or maybe he resigned. In any case, he's gone from 25+ years as AP bureau chief. He's the only bureau chief I can remember.
That all spells censorship to me ...
So ... what exactly is left of our democracy that we're trying so hard to "spread like a flower" throughout the Middle East?
**We don't have a verifiable voting system.
**We don't have a free press.
**We do have rampant jerrymandering.
**The system of checks and balances among the three branches of the federal government is in tatters.
We'd better hope for some good strong candidates in 2008 or our ship is well and truly sunk.
Granuaile
Okay, I hope none of you out there is named Janet ... this isn't aimed at you. Some of you might remember that line from SNL of the early 80's (and thus I'm dating myself).
But, look at this article. It's from my hometown newspaper. The head of Vermont's AP bureau was fired (or did he "resign"?) over a column he ran last week. What was so controversial about this column you might ask? Well, it was a column written by our Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) criticizing the administration's secretive policies vis a vis the press. A column written by a Senator for heaven's sake ... now Senators are being censored.
Update: Check out this article for more details
Update 2: Just thought I'd mention that we (my parents and I) originally learned about this in an article in the print version of yesterday's NYTimes. But I can't access that because I don't subscribe to it. But if you want to you can browse it and find the article yourself.
Now first of all the column got pulled before it hit the national wire.
Then, Chris Graff got fired ... or maybe he resigned. In any case, he's gone from 25+ years as AP bureau chief. He's the only bureau chief I can remember.
That all spells censorship to me ...
So ... what exactly is left of our democracy that we're trying so hard to "spread like a flower" throughout the Middle East?
**We don't have a verifiable voting system.
**We don't have a free press.
**We do have rampant jerrymandering.
**The system of checks and balances among the three branches of the federal government is in tatters.
We'd better hope for some good strong candidates in 2008 or our ship is well and truly sunk.
Granuaile
19 January 2006
Oh ... Really?
Greetings Fellow Bloggers and Other Miscreants,
Overheard from White House Spokesman Scott McLellan:
"We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business."
Well ... I guess that's why there are so many fewer of them now than there were in 2001. We're mighty fortunate.
Granuaile.
Overheard from White House Spokesman Scott McLellan:
"We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business."
Well ... I guess that's why there are so many fewer of them now than there were in 2001. We're mighty fortunate.
Granuaile.
13 December 2005
23 November 2005
Poke In the Eye With a Sharp Stick
Greetings Fellow Bloggers and Other Miscreants,
Well, the next time the good reverend Pat Robertson decides to take out a hit on a head of state, he first ought to consider the good works that person may have done. Especially when said head of state has potentially given more to the poor of this USofA than he has.
Granuaile
Well, the next time the good reverend Pat Robertson decides to take out a hit on a head of state, he first ought to consider the good works that person may have done. Especially when said head of state has potentially given more to the poor of this USofA than he has.
Granuaile
21 November 2005
2008?
Greetings fellow bloggers and other miscreants,
I homeschool my 6th grader and my 3rd grader. So I belong to a couple of yahoogroups that are dedicated to homeschool issues. One in particular is a group of homeschoolers who are also dedicated to progressive political issues. So we talk more about politics than homeschooling, altho the two sometimes merge.
Yesterday someone raised the question, would you vote for Hillary Clinton if she were on the Presidential ticket in 2008? Well, I think the question was actually, if it were 2008 right now, would you vote for her? I was surprised to find that almost overwhelmingly the answer to that was very negative.
Most of the people on this list questioned her ability to lead, questioned her integrity and see her in a similar light as John Kerry. They see her as an extremely political animal. But the thing that really surprised me was how voraciously this group is also de-crying the Democratic National Committee. I've been feeling for a long time like they just keep shoving bad choices down my throat, but I was heartened to hear others saying they feel the same.
I just hope the DNC can hear us too.
Granuaile.
I homeschool my 6th grader and my 3rd grader. So I belong to a couple of yahoogroups that are dedicated to homeschool issues. One in particular is a group of homeschoolers who are also dedicated to progressive political issues. So we talk more about politics than homeschooling, altho the two sometimes merge.
Yesterday someone raised the question, would you vote for Hillary Clinton if she were on the Presidential ticket in 2008? Well, I think the question was actually, if it were 2008 right now, would you vote for her? I was surprised to find that almost overwhelmingly the answer to that was very negative.
Most of the people on this list questioned her ability to lead, questioned her integrity and see her in a similar light as John Kerry. They see her as an extremely political animal. But the thing that really surprised me was how voraciously this group is also de-crying the Democratic National Committee. I've been feeling for a long time like they just keep shoving bad choices down my throat, but I was heartened to hear others saying they feel the same.
I just hope the DNC can hear us too.
Granuaile.
Fearless Leader
Greetings fellow bloggers and other miscreants,
I continue to be grateful to the BBC. Without them, we'd never know how wonderful our president truly is.
Granuaile.
16 November 2005
Take Heart
Greetings fellow bloggers and other miscreants,
We can only hope that new veep chief of staff Addington has cause to travel to London sometime soon. Read this article to find out why he will be hoist with his own petard.
Granuaile
We can only hope that new veep chief of staff Addington has cause to travel to London sometime soon. Read this article to find out why he will be hoist with his own petard.
Granuaile
14 November 2005
Democracy
Greetings fellow bloggers and other miscreants,
Follow this link and read the letter that was published in the Eugene, Oregon Register-Guard written by Stephen Barnes and published in their Opinion section ... because I think everyone I know should read it, then they should send it to everyone they know, and they should send it to everyone they know and so on and so on.
Everyone in this whole country needs to read this letter.
Everyone is this whole country should be hanging our heads in shame over what our government and thus we the people have done. We have sunk so low.
Follow this link and read the letter that was published in the Eugene, Oregon Register-Guard written by Stephen Barnes and published in their Opinion section ... because I think everyone I know should read it, then they should send it to everyone they know, and they should send it to everyone they know and so on and so on.
Everyone in this whole country needs to read this letter.
Everyone is this whole country should be hanging our heads in shame over what our government and thus we the people have done. We have sunk so low.
13 November 2005
Hypocrisy
Greetings fellow bloggers and other miscreants,
Did anyone else read this article in BBC about the US tackling Syria for human rights abuses?
Ummm ... why on earth does anyone in the current administration think that anyone else in the world is going to take that kind of criticsm seriously coming from them?
One cannot commit some of the most egregious human rights abuses in the last 25 years, refuse to be held accountable for it, scream that the leakers be brought to "justice" and then be taken seriously on human rights anywhere in the world ... even here.
Do we understand how much danger we are all now in?
Did anyone else read this article in BBC about the US tackling Syria for human rights abuses?
Ummm ... why on earth does anyone in the current administration think that anyone else in the world is going to take that kind of criticsm seriously coming from them?
One cannot commit some of the most egregious human rights abuses in the last 25 years, refuse to be held accountable for it, scream that the leakers be brought to "justice" and then be taken seriously on human rights anywhere in the world ... even here.
Do we understand how much danger we are all now in?
11 November 2005
Mid-Term Elections
Greetings Fellow Bloggers and Other Miscreants,
The mid-term elections took place earlier this week. Sometimes I think the state of Virginia is schizophrenic.
Republican senators. Largely Republican Congressmen. Democratic Governor most of the time.
Go figure.
Here was the strangest part of all. The Republican candidate ran one of the most vicious campaigns ever. The attack ads were beyond the pale. The Democrat did not respond in kind. I was amazed. It was a wondrous thing. He went on to win. I'm not sure he's going to be good for the state. He'll be better than the Republican would have been. But still ....
The mid-term elections took place earlier this week. Sometimes I think the state of Virginia is schizophrenic.
Republican senators. Largely Republican Congressmen. Democratic Governor most of the time.
Go figure.
Here was the strangest part of all. The Republican candidate ran one of the most vicious campaigns ever. The attack ads were beyond the pale. The Democrat did not respond in kind. I was amazed. It was a wondrous thing. He went on to win. I'm not sure he's going to be good for the state. He'll be better than the Republican would have been. But still ....
Shame
Greetings Fellow Bloggers and Other Miscreants,
When, the other day, I heard about the latest bombing in Amman, Jordan, I went to the BBC website to read about it. That's where I take most of my news now ... BBC. They are more credible than any stateside source. They also have a unique feature with most of their articles ... e-mail commentary. It's almost like a blog comment feature. You probably all know what I'm talking about. Because anyone who is reading this, has read the BBC.
In any case, I read the comments from around the world. One stopped me cold. The writer issued a challenge to the United States to send as much aid to Amman as they do to Israel, but went on to imagine that we would not. Several other writers imagined that the U.S. would not care as much about Jordan as we do about other oil producing countries. Etc., etc., etc. I started to try to write some feeble defense of us ... you know ... the "other 48%" who did not vote for GW. To tell the world that there is a whole other side of this country who does care about the rest of the world. But then I realized ...
much to my ...
SHAME ...
the government we have IS our country to the rest of the world. This is it. W is the face of us to everyone else.
What shame.
When, the other day, I heard about the latest bombing in Amman, Jordan, I went to the BBC website to read about it. That's where I take most of my news now ... BBC. They are more credible than any stateside source. They also have a unique feature with most of their articles ... e-mail commentary. It's almost like a blog comment feature. You probably all know what I'm talking about. Because anyone who is reading this, has read the BBC.
In any case, I read the comments from around the world. One stopped me cold. The writer issued a challenge to the United States to send as much aid to Amman as they do to Israel, but went on to imagine that we would not. Several other writers imagined that the U.S. would not care as much about Jordan as we do about other oil producing countries. Etc., etc., etc. I started to try to write some feeble defense of us ... you know ... the "other 48%" who did not vote for GW. To tell the world that there is a whole other side of this country who does care about the rest of the world. But then I realized ...
much to my ...
SHAME ...
the government we have IS our country to the rest of the world. This is it. W is the face of us to everyone else.
What shame.
28 September 2005
Give Peace A Chance
Greetings Fellow Bloggers and other miscreants:
O ho ... remember that oldie, but goodie? I hardly dare haul it out of the closet. It's sort of dusty and wrinkly. But let's take a look at it for a moment. We'll shake it out. And take it for a spin around the block to see what happens.
I was thinking about this the other day. It popped into my head. I remember it from my childhood during the Vietnam War. I remember all the peaceniks chanting it under Nixon's White House. I had no idea what they meant. I'm not sure they did either. They were very earnest, those young people.
But here's what I was thinking about it. There are very few leaders who have honestly ever given peace a chance. I can pretty much count them on one hand. Um, Gandhi. And ... Martin Luther King, Jr. Is there anyone else? Jesus. Anyone else? Even though I consider myself a Christian by calling, I will have to say here that I would not say that Jesus gave peace a chance. I would say that because Jesus was not a political leader, and here I'm talking politics. So, although I call myself one of his followers, I'm throwing his name out of this ring. Back to the drawing board ... I can't think of any others. Can any of you? If you can, please post them in the Comments because I'd like to get a conversation going on this. I'm going to continue on with my thoughts here.
Alright ... here's the problem. For the last, oh, all of recorded history, whenever there has been a conflict between nations or kings, the drums of war roll. It's what we do. But when have we seriously, and I mean seriously, tried peace. Who has given peace a chance? Gandhi did. And with stunning consequences. War has a somewhat less remarkable record. A win usually comes at a very high price.
I just wonder what would happen if we truly sat down one day, banged our swords into plowshares and really did give peace a chance. What would that look like? Take a moment ... Imagine.
O ho ... remember that oldie, but goodie? I hardly dare haul it out of the closet. It's sort of dusty and wrinkly. But let's take a look at it for a moment. We'll shake it out. And take it for a spin around the block to see what happens.
I was thinking about this the other day. It popped into my head. I remember it from my childhood during the Vietnam War. I remember all the peaceniks chanting it under Nixon's White House. I had no idea what they meant. I'm not sure they did either. They were very earnest, those young people.
But here's what I was thinking about it. There are very few leaders who have honestly ever given peace a chance. I can pretty much count them on one hand. Um, Gandhi. And ... Martin Luther King, Jr. Is there anyone else? Jesus. Anyone else? Even though I consider myself a Christian by calling, I will have to say here that I would not say that Jesus gave peace a chance. I would say that because Jesus was not a political leader, and here I'm talking politics. So, although I call myself one of his followers, I'm throwing his name out of this ring. Back to the drawing board ... I can't think of any others. Can any of you? If you can, please post them in the Comments because I'd like to get a conversation going on this. I'm going to continue on with my thoughts here.
Alright ... here's the problem. For the last, oh, all of recorded history, whenever there has been a conflict between nations or kings, the drums of war roll. It's what we do. But when have we seriously, and I mean seriously, tried peace. Who has given peace a chance? Gandhi did. And with stunning consequences. War has a somewhat less remarkable record. A win usually comes at a very high price.
I just wonder what would happen if we truly sat down one day, banged our swords into plowshares and really did give peace a chance. What would that look like? Take a moment ... Imagine.
15 September 2005
Osama Won
Greetings Fellow bloggers and other miscreants,
Well, I think we have to finally say that Osama won.
Al Qaeda won.
There it's been said.
We can dispense with that and move along to the important stuff.
They won because we now have to wait in long security lines at airports ... but we're really not any safer.
They won because we've spent untold millions on "Homeland Security" but we couldn't help save a flea in New Orleans two weeks ago. In fact, if Katrina had hit in 2000, I think the residents of New Orleans would have been better off. They would have been safer.
I think it was Ronald Reagan who asked us to ask ourselves whether we were better or worse off than we were before his opponent took office. Well, now we have to admit ... we are much worse off than we were before 2001. I'm not pointing fingers, I'm just saying that we've thrown our money down a rathole.
Now let's combine this rathole with a quagmire that is attracting militants and terrorists to it's cause (Iraq). We are in a world of hurt at the moment.
In the next election cycle we need to elect a real leader. Not just someone who is different from gwb. Not just a democrat. But a "real" leader. Someone who can pull this country's irons out of the fire.
Does anyone have any good ideas?
Well, I think we have to finally say that Osama won.
Al Qaeda won.
There it's been said.
We can dispense with that and move along to the important stuff.
They won because we now have to wait in long security lines at airports ... but we're really not any safer.
They won because we've spent untold millions on "Homeland Security" but we couldn't help save a flea in New Orleans two weeks ago. In fact, if Katrina had hit in 2000, I think the residents of New Orleans would have been better off. They would have been safer.
I think it was Ronald Reagan who asked us to ask ourselves whether we were better or worse off than we were before his opponent took office. Well, now we have to admit ... we are much worse off than we were before 2001. I'm not pointing fingers, I'm just saying that we've thrown our money down a rathole.
Now let's combine this rathole with a quagmire that is attracting militants and terrorists to it's cause (Iraq). We are in a world of hurt at the moment.
In the next election cycle we need to elect a real leader. Not just someone who is different from gwb. Not just a democrat. But a "real" leader. Someone who can pull this country's irons out of the fire.
Does anyone have any good ideas?
13 September 2005
New Aristocracy
Greetings fellow bloggers and other miscreants ...
I firmly believe that we have managed to recreate the aristocracy of Europe. And in our usual fashion we've done it bigger and faster.
It took France (in conjunction with Austria, Prussia and all those other little places) about 1000 years to produce Marie Antoinette and her peers.
It took U.S. about 200 years to produce gwb and his.
Way to go.
Yes, I know that this photo is a fakery. I also know that Marie Antoinette probably never said, "Let them eat cake." ... It's the sentiment that's the thing. She was so out of touch with the people of France (and Austria for that matter) that it could credibly be said of her. And gwb is that out of touch with his people.
If you click on the link embedded in the gwb above, you'll find a post that is far more eloquent than I could ever be about how this person wishes gwb had responded to the crisis of Katrina as a person. As someone with feeling and a heart; as the rest of us did.
The real problem with gwb is not what the government did or didn't do. What FEMA did or didn't do, but it's that he wasn't with the rest of us gnashing his teeth and crying out to the God he claims to believe in over the pain of the death and destruction that was the Gulf Coast and particularly in New Orleans. He was too busy cracking jokes about parties and drinking; a latter day version of "Let them eat cake."
And that's what is so very wrong with his response to Katrina. It has nothing to do with speed, or the lack thereof. It has everything to do with compassion ... or the lack thereof.
I firmly believe that we have managed to recreate the aristocracy of Europe. And in our usual fashion we've done it bigger and faster.
It took France (in conjunction with Austria, Prussia and all those other little places) about 1000 years to produce Marie Antoinette and her peers.
It took U.S. about 200 years to produce gwb and his.
Way to go.
Yes, I know that this photo is a fakery. I also know that Marie Antoinette probably never said, "Let them eat cake." ... It's the sentiment that's the thing. She was so out of touch with the people of France (and Austria for that matter) that it could credibly be said of her. And gwb is that out of touch with his people.
If you click on the link embedded in the gwb above, you'll find a post that is far more eloquent than I could ever be about how this person wishes gwb had responded to the crisis of Katrina as a person. As someone with feeling and a heart; as the rest of us did.
The real problem with gwb is not what the government did or didn't do. What FEMA did or didn't do, but it's that he wasn't with the rest of us gnashing his teeth and crying out to the God he claims to believe in over the pain of the death and destruction that was the Gulf Coast and particularly in New Orleans. He was too busy cracking jokes about parties and drinking; a latter day version of "Let them eat cake."
And that's what is so very wrong with his response to Katrina. It has nothing to do with speed, or the lack thereof. It has everything to do with compassion ... or the lack thereof.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
